Heathen Tax Havens Top World GDP

The Prime Minister of Iceland just resigned. The right honorable PM did not have major funds in a tax havens. He asserted this to journalists. That was correct. His very rich blonde wife did have dark money funds in tax havens, though. This has been revealed in Tax Havens. And the PM had claimed she did not. And how did the wife get so rich? Like Chelsea Clinton? Becoming a hedge fund money manager in her early twenties? Just asking.

What’s a Tax Havens? A place with little or no taxes. By claiming residency there, individuals or corporations can escape taxes. Plutocratic corporations can claim their profits there. They do this by charging extravagant charges to their subsidiaries. Thus subsidiaries in high tax countries (such as the leading countries of the West: USA, Germany, France, UK, Italy, etc.) are not “profitable”, because they spent all their money paying a subsidiary in a

According to the IMF, there are around 60 Tax Havens around the world, 50% of world financial transactions pass through Tax Havens, for a grand total of 25,000 billion dollars ($25 trillions).

What Can’t Be Seen, Can’t Be Taxed. Or Why Dark Liquidity Grows Ever More, As Its Engine, Plutocracy, Grows

One should stop and meditate this number. The established mental order, in economy quantifies the performance of societies according to GDP (not Gross Demonic Product, but Domestic, supposedly). GDP is just the sum of all financial transactions.

365 major international banks are involved in just the particular scandal at hand. The British centered bank HSBC alone is involved in 2300 screen societies managed by that law firm, Mossak Fonseca.

The idea of Tax Havens came from Great Britain, and initially was directed to the Anglo-Norman isles.

To be viewed officially as financially clean, that is, not a tax haven, a country has to make 12 tax treaties with other countries. Thus Panama has tax treaties with Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, etc.: tax havens, by signing treaties with other tax havens certify each other to not be tax havens.

Could the great leaders of the great democracies have ignored all the preceding? Sure. That’s what they did. David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, is an expert; he ignored his father’s overseas, false name accounts.

“David Cameron’s father ran an offshore fund that avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army ofBahamas residents – including a part-time bishop – to sign its paperwork.

Ian Cameron was a director of Blairmore Holdings Inc, an investment fund run from the Bahamas but named after the family’s ancestral home in Aberdeenshire, which managed tens of millions of pounds on behalf of wealthy families.

Clients included Isidore Kerman, an adviser to Robert Maxwell who once owned the West End restaurants Scott’s and J Sheekey, and Leopold Joseph, a private bank used by the Rolling Stones.

The fund was founded in the early 1980s with help from the prime minister’s late father and still exists today. The Guardian has confirmed that in 30 years Blairmore has never paid a penny of tax in the UK on its profits.

The prime minister’s spokeswoman said that Downing Street had responded to allegations about Ian Cameron in the past.

Asked if there was still any family money invested in the fund, she said: “That is a private matter.” She said the prime minister had “taken a range of action to tackle evasion and aggressive tax avoidance”.

The Panama Papers, 11.5m documents leaked from the offshore agent Mossack Fonseca, reveal the details of how Cameron Sr sheltered Blairmore’s profits with a series of expensive and complicated arrangements.”

How was all this possible? How come We The People have become so lenient for the crooks who govern us? How did we become sheep? Panem Et Circenses, the Roman historian and philosopher Juvenal put it, 19 centuries ago: bread and circuses. Distract people with distributions of bread and circuses. This can set a degeneracy of minds which can fester for centuries. Roman citizens did not revolt until the Nika Riots, four centuries after Juvenal. Those started after increasingly violent confrontations, years after years, of partisans of the “Blues” and “Greens” teams of charioteers. Roman citizens had lost all taste for politics. Actually this started a few generations before Juvenal wrote, when a bunch of major plutocratic crooks such as Brutus (who, before becoming the assassin of Caesar, had been a major corrupt Roman official in “Asia”).

Under the second emperor (or “Princeps”), Tiberius, the Roman national assembly felt so irrelevant, that it fell in disuse. We The Roman People felt that governance had been completely confiscated by the major plutocrats, so why bother?

How not to fall in the same despondency? Well, by mustering some rage, or, at the very least, anger, as Senator Bernie Sanders has been doing, and showing. In a most timely, and wise, manner.

19 Responses to “Heathen Tax Havens Top World GDP”

I’m currently reading an excellent biography of Trump (which will come out in May in paperback as “The Truth About Trump” – highly recommended).
Trump’s father Fred made his $100 million with exactly these sort of tactics – dodgy intercompany pricing on government subsidized housing projects.

Trump used to be my whipping boy in the now distant past, I viewed him as the archetype of banks’ excess. HOWEVER, we have seen incredibly worse in the meantime. For example the Clintons. And I worked (hard) for Obama, before being (or feeling incredibly) betrayed. So now, well… The Cruz scenario has unfolded just like I said it would, back in December… Except Trump has taken a greater ascendency than expected.

I thought the father made $250 million. But maybe it’s a question of constant v variable dollars.
The Trumps themselves were victim of discrimination, but junior had no qualms attacking the system. He sued and attacked many, from the Feds to more or less Indian Indians… Now he is friends of red necks rather than red skins… Anyway junior jumped from Brooklyn to Manhattan

Also I would like to note (although you may have mentioned this before) that HSBC stands for Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation which was built on profits from the opium trade. Plus ca change etc.

The 1840’s opium wars are an absolutely loathsome part of the British empire history – among organized famines, populations replacement to divide & rule (the UK lecturing Sri Lanka on its handling of the Tamil rebellion a few years ago was just ludicrously hypocritical, seeing how the very conflict was artificially created by its imperial rule, for example), organized racism, etc, etc, ad nauseam.
Not to mention that it makes quite credible the idea that the current drug trafficking industry is part and parcel of the very same “invisible” (financial) empire, that is just the former British empire having gone global.

Hi Kevin! Good point! These opium wars, indeed, are a testimony that plutocracy is not just about money, wealth, but that it is deeply demonic, cruel, as vicious as it gets!

I had a vast essay nearly finished about drug trafficking, which, it has been amply shown something not organized by some illiterate losers in the mountainous wastes of Mexico, but at the White House, on Wall Street, and the like. They kill “drug traffickers” yet, those who make the drug trafficking possible, the financiers, when caught doing just that, see modest fines given to their banks. Why don’t they kill them too?

Just a question. I cannot be suspected of hatred against law and order in matter of drugs. I personally use only one drug, and I have ever used only one drug, caffeine (and its ilk). Lots of caffeine… Not after 3 pm, though…

But it’s transparent to me that drugs are the drugs of We The People. Addiction has replaced Revolution. And it’s deliberate.

Patrice, your pace of revealing vital truths is so fast that it’s hard for me to keep up. Sanders won Wisconsin tonight by a 13% landslide and beat the poll average by 10%. This is a huge disappointment to the courtiers to plutocracy who type at the NYT and WP, and who have tenure on the TV networks. They want democracy to go away, but as long as we are still able to vote against shills for plutocracy like Hillary, we will. I suspect that new rules will be put in place to make sure this never happens again, so we should enjoy it while it lasts. Thanks again.

I thank you for appreciating my efforts. It’s too bad that Hillary the Pluto shill is on track to parody a sort of “democrat” candidate for president. The MSM against Bernie Sanders was too effective, too long…

Yes, it’s real awesome the lower classes and minorities are going for the completely corrupt Clinton. I mean, I am all for a woman president, of course, but that one looks more corrupt than Trump, by long shot

Very interesting. Even though most of the information therein has been found here, more or less, it’s good to see it from another point of view… Except for one point, namely that dirty, dark money from tax havens would have helped to save the system in 2008… I think he is a bit naïve. 2008 was a transfer of money from some super wealthy plutocrats to others, ruining the former, thus the system (OURS!!!) which they controlled. The main transfer afterwards was from We the People money creating machinery to those ex-super wealthy, so they could be super wealthy again. Quantitative Easing total amount has been controversial. It may have been more, in toto, than one year of EU GDP…

Still, DD is right, one shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth; whatever the agenda, such a burst of cleansing light will (may, might, should) have some further effect, beyond any immediate political cookie points. After all, the Wikileaks (“anti-empire”, red/brown, rightists/leftists) or the Snowden (billionaires shillls, libertarian) have been beneficial in that, at least, they upset the status quo and show the dirt hidden out of sight (to the point life has been made more than uncomfortable for their frontmen).

Anyway, compare & contrast to the exposure given to the Liber scandal, or to the ongoing Unaoil one – or to the older Yamamah deals, that put the Taiwan frigates to shame. Dirt is really worth exposing for the (Anglo-led) international media, if it doesn’t strike too close at home.

Kevin: Thanks for the link, very interesting. I have mentioned censorship by the Main Stream Media (MSM) many times in the past, and my articles have been reproduced here and there on the Internet. Basically the entire MSM is just a manipulation bag. This is why we end up with Cruz, Trump Hillary as main candidates. Or why Obama spent seven years doing nothing, but for ISIL (which he is now undoing).

The Guardian presents itself as an independent newspaper doing independent journalism, but it actually censors me. It has been doing so for years (they let a comment of mine go through every few months or so, to claim they don’t really censor me). They never explained why. When I open the paper on line, a big red banner notifies me of my censorship status. It’s roughly as subtle as the Gestapo. Thus I avoid the paper. I never go to the Huffington Post: they just prevent me to publish stuff, and don’t bother to warn me of it.
In any case, when the Panama Papers came out, I went to the Guardian, and I saw the giant attacks against Putin. I was zero surprised. Panama Putin, of course. If we have inequality in the West, no decent housing, plutocrats doing all this philanthropy, Trump, Cruz and Clinton, it’s all because of Panama Putin. And if Apple shelters most of its profits from taxation, it’s to protect our privacy better, against Panama Putin.

Attacking the Anglo-Saxons is funny, but, the French establishment, let alone Euro establishment, is fully accomplice. If I were French president, I would slap a 100% tax on Apple phones, today. And I would explain why: criminal organization, tax evading, not cooperating with law enforcement. There are actually Apple like smart phones MANUFACTURERS in France. De Gaulle, bless his name not, used those sorts of methods… And it worked. Something about being a soldier who had seen combat…

The finance industry is rallying its trolls today: ample are seeking to comment on the blog saying three things.

The first is that Cameron did not avoid tax using an offshore fund. Well actually, that’s not true: part (but I agree not all) of all such funds can be rolled up tax free. But to be candid, I’m not making a big deal of this.

Second they say there was no avoidance in the fund. But in that case why go to such lengths to be offshore to ensure no tax was paid? Of course there was avoidance.

And third, all seem to ignore the bearer share issue and the fact that the additional costs of being offshore must have been for a good reason, which can only be tax.

So they are by and large being deleted and this is the reply to all who try to repeat the exercise.

But I repeat,my argument is fourfold.

First Ian Cameron avoided tax, legally.

Second, Cameron benefitted from that.

Third, he says he is proud of what his dad did.

And fourth he condemned Jimmy Carr for avoiding tax.

This is the problem.

If he said, as I mentioned earlier this week, that he respected his dad but would not have done as he did then David Cameron could walk away from this head held high. His having an investment in the fund for a while would not have changed that for me. But it’s the fact that he has condoned the use of offshore by his father (and so by implication, I presume, by others) that I think is wrong and the trolls seem quite unable to get that this is what I am saying.

Hi Paul! Thanks for this, very interesting. On my latest essay, today, I mentioned Paul Krugman. Krugman is supposedly the most trusted opinion maker… among “liberals”… even in Europe, not just the US! However, he is incendiary against Sanders… and strictly censored me! Anyway, my essay speaks for itself.
With Cameron lost in space, I worry about the Brexit referendum, which now may well pass…

[Sent to WaPo, as a comment to Lawrence Summers’ mellifluous, wishy-washy considerations about globalization.]

Globalization of money without globalization of law has brought plutocratization, the encroaching control of the world by the greediest and worst instincts.
So it’s not just a question of harmonization. One has to make a cadaster of world wealth, to find out who owns what. To be fought, plutocrats and their plots have to be detected.
Patrice Ayme